“The essential form of power of networks is in their ability to shape the human mind, if we do not know the forms of power in the network society, we will not be able to neutralize the unjust exercise of such power; And if we don’t know exactly who has power and where to find them, we won’t be able to challenge their hidden but decisive domination.”
Manuel Castells. Communication and Power 2009
The Network Dilemma is a recent Netflix paper on how social media is causing unintended harm to individuals and society. It’s an interesting and controversial film that’s worth watching so you can form your own opinion.
I watched the documentary at the suggestion of one of my favorite sisters-in-law who had seen the documentary on Netflix and said, “Watch it when you can at some point, I’d like to have your opinion.” “I look at him and we talk,” I replied. So I have taken advantage of the bridge to see it, and today I share with Graci and all of you my views on the film.
In the film, filmmaker Jeff Orlowski interviews a cast of tech leaders, including Tristan Harris, former design ethicist at Facebook’s Google, Tim Kendall, former president of Pinterest, and other technologists, who candidly offer their insights and share their concerns about social media and the harm it believes, in their opinion, They are causing society.
Tristan Harris, the driving force behind the narrative, points out that the “dilemma” is that social media and related apps simultaneously offer utopia and dystopia. In simple words, they have bad things and good things, they bring out the best and the worst in society. Without a doubt, social networks bring us great benefits, in terms of keeping us connected with our loved ones, friends and community, sharing information, preferences and feelings. The question is at what price?
This, in my opinion, is the truly disturbing part of the film, knowing how far Facebook and other companies are willing to go, in order to capture our attention that is the basis of their growth and economic model. “If the product is free, you are the product,” Harris reminds us. And although most people know that the business model of companies like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or YouTube, is essentially based on capturing our attention, staying connected to their platform as long as possible, and monetizing our attention with ads. Few people are aware of the level of manipulation and its consequences, and if you think the cost is simply to get specific ads for your favorite series, the documentary reserves a big surprise for you.
Beyond alarmism that may have some images and music almost worthy of a Hitchcock thriller, The documentary examines in detail and highlights the functioning of the mechanisms of power creation in social networks, And it comes as an urgent warning about the risk to our democracy if we fail to change the course of the new care economy.
If, as Castells affirms, the essential form of power in the Network Society is in the ability to shape the mind, The primary battle for defining society’s norms and applying those norms to daily life revolves around the shaping of the mind. And Undoubtedly, as we have already collected in a previous reflection “Social Redarchy and Democratic Generation”, social networks are fundamental in this struggle, since it is through communication that the human mind interacts with its social and natural environment.
In the current technological context, social networks go beyond traditional media and have profoundly modified power relations. The fact that social media platforms are dealing with an addictive product, and the deliberate manipulation of the human brain is troubling for two simple reasons. Firstly, social media is persuasive and secondly it is in widespread use among our young people. As we continue to drown in an excess of stimuli that try to capture our attention, Perhaps we should stop for a moment to focus on paying attention to the darker side of social media. What our young people pay attention to every minute of their lives.
They know everything: absolutely everything
What the documentary wants us to know is that they know everything, absolutely everything about us. “Everything we do from any device is seen, tracked, measured. Every action we take is carefully monitored and recorded. What image do you stop at, if it’s your girlfriend, a former partner, or a friend and record how long you look at it. They know when people feel lonely. They know when people are depressed. If you are introverted or extroverted or what kind of neurosis you have. They know what you do late at night. What videos you watch, how much sleep you get. “They know everything.”
And with that they build an increasingly accurate model of our emotions and behaviors, so that they can predict the kinds of things we do and how to take and keep us attentive to their platform. I can predict what kind of videos will keep you watching, and what kind of emotions tend to trigger it. “They have created a whole global generation of people who have grown up in a context where the very meaning of communication, the very meaning of culture, is manipulation.” These companies have put their platforms at the absolute center of everything we do.
Attention as currency
The term “attention economy” was coined by psychologist, economist and Nobel laureate Herbert A. Simon, who postulated that attention was the “bottleneck of human thought” that limits both what we can perceive in stimulating environments and what we can do. In other words, a lot of information creates attention poverty. Information is not scarce, attention is. Our attention today more than ever is limited, valuable, and scarce.
We have more and more access to more information and yet our attention span does not increase. In this scenario, companies and individuals strive to capture and monetize it. That’s what we call the attention economy.
And here’s the problem , social platforms generate billions of dollars by keeping us connected, clicking, viewing content and sharing our favorite topics. The unbridled, unprincipled race for our attention shatters the truth, polarizes society, manipulates our elections, harms the health of our youth, and destabilizes our communities and democracy in general. In Harris’ words, “Just as a tree is worth more as wood and a whale is worth more dead than alive, in the attention economy, as human beings we are worth more when we are depressed, outraged, polarized and addicted.”
The programming of behaviors
The documentary is very impactful when it explores the means by which tech companies use human vulnerability, particularly cognitive biases. and persuasive technologies to fuel addiction to their platforms, especially among young users. In the words of one of Facebook’s early growth hacking leaders, Chamath Palihapitiya, “We curate our content and interactions around this perceived sense of perfection because we are rewarded with short-term cues: hearts, likes, thumbs up. And we associate all of this with courage and truth, which is a false and fragile popularity.”
Every time we open our phone, we have to unconsciously wrestle with powerful algorithms, and persuasive design techniques sophisticated enough to keep our addiction going. People think algorithms are designed to give them relevant and useful information, which is what they really want, but that’s not the case. Their goals are to maximize the time we are connected each day, to make us return as soon as possible, to invite our friends and for them to invite more friends. The ultimate business goal is to generate as much money as possible from advertising. We are definitely the product.
Disinformation and polarization
The film also highlights the growing spread of misinformation, and how the structure of social media affects the degree of political polarization in society. The radicalization of extremist movements, such as white supremacists in the United States, political polarization in many European countries including our own, and the use of propaganda by authoritarian regimes in countries such as the Philippines, are just a few examples where these platforms have a high social cost in terms of democratic quality and social peace.
If we only follow in the networks those who think like us, we no longer need to argue, reflect or rethink anything. In this sense it can be said that everyone in their ” filter bubble” builds the world they want to see. As Eric Schmidt said, “It will be very difficult for people to see or consume something that somehow hasn’t been designed for them.”
The most troubling question posed by “The Social Dilemma” is whether democracy can survive the confusion of facts and polarization of society. “Imagine a world where no one believes what is true.”
Facebook’s defense
Facebook is the only company to have published a Official response in which he explains seven reasons why “The Social Dilemma” doesn’t tell the truth. In its defense document denying that its products are designed to be addictive, and explaining that although its business model is advertising, they do not reveal the identity of their users to advertisers. He argues that his algorithms are not as harmful as the documentary says, but that they seek to make the contents “useful and relevant” to users. And regarding the denunciations of the dangers of disinformation, he says that they have invested a lot of money in recent years to guarantee impartiality in electoral processes, and that they fight every day against fake news and hate speech. In the film most interviewees are reluctant to directly label Mark Zuckerberg, or any other executive, as responsible for the negative consequences of social media, preferring to present tech platforms as victims of their own success, trapped in a business model that generates billions of dollars by keeping us clicking. connected and sharing. Judge for yourselves.
The need to reprogram social networks
Although I have not stopped being concerned all these years, like many of you, about the ethical implications of social networks. I think we were naïve about the other side of that coin. And the way social platforms are using persuasive technologies is quite different from what was expected.
No one, I think, intended any of these consequences. But I largely share the allegations of the documentary, and I believe the evidence it presents in relation to the negative effects of social networks in terms of addiction of our young people, manipulation of our feelings, social polarization and widespread misinformation. CThey are eroding our social fabric and represent a danger to democracy. I encourage you to look at it and draw your own conclusions.
What to do?. Continuing with the thesis of Castells, if the essential form of power of networks is in their ability to shape the human mind, and this power is exercised through the programming and interconnection of networks. We necessarily have to reprogram the networks, around ethical principles, and alternative humanist interests and values.
As the Center for Human Technology (CHT) proposes, we need radically new social platforms and business models that truly align with humanity’s best interests. We must reprogram our networks and stop as soon as possible this attention economy that is accelerating the massive degradation of our society and limiting our collective ability to solve global threats, from pandemics to inequality and climate change. “If we can’t make sense of the world while making ever more important decisions in a global society, we are risking our children’s future, democracy and truth itself.”
It will not be an easy task, it is a collective challenge that requires appealing to the best of our human nature to develop new open and independent social networks, based on shared ethical values that allow us to ensure a bright future for our children that allows them to find renewed purpose in their lives, Based on their dreams, what they love, and want to do with their lives including their worries and fears. Our collective commitment must be to ensure that their lives are not subject to the manipulation and economic interests of a few.
While we reprogram them, at the societal level we should seriously debate the need to regulate social media platforms. As the documentary argues, there is no fiscal or economic reason for these companies to change their algorithms or self-regulate. “Like a chemical company having to comply with environmental regulations, the social cost associated with social media platforms must be controlled to mitigate their worst effects.”
On a personal level, beyond knowing the harms, we must learn to protect ourselves and our young people. Protecting our attention, restoring truth, and strengthening our democracy. Making sure you get many different types of information and following people you disagree with is the best way to combat cognitive dissonance. Setting a limit to the time we spend in front of a screen, leaving mobile phones at specific times, such as when we are with family, eating or when we go to sleep are practical ways to control what we devote our attention to. That is something we should do right now.
Discover more from José Cabrera
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
